Thank You For Protecting Our Country Sir ..

sickboy

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2929260
You like 700.00 power bills? thats probably what it would cost if the utility companies have to start going to court to get permission to stop providing services to people who don't pay for them. Thats on top of additional taxes needed to hire more law enforcement/court personnel to deal with the bureaucracy end of things.
There are plenty of low income assistance programs in place. Take a look at your utility bills, you ar hit with fees to pay for them. Why this man wasn't using it I don't know.
Yeah, I pay a $700 power bill. Come on, thats a bit drastic isn't it? I mean, yes I probably pay a few bucks more than you do on my monthly bill, but I'm OK with that tax. In fact, I would rather pay a few bucks more in this situation. Look, its ok to say dead beats 'stealing' your electricity are bad, but look at this guy. I would rather 100 deadbeats steal my heat rather than this 1 patriot dying. That is, in my opinion, efficient...or at least more efficient than the power company getting their money.
 
sickboy

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/2929265
That is going to spark some replies, but IMHO a right to life, sure. But a right to government provided electricity, after many months of non-payment, and non-involvement in any of the programs offered that would have sorted this out? No....
Again, my point is that if it's really possible for us to define "someone in need??"
I see what you are saying and I agree, but I still can not justify the death of a 90 year old veteran with the profit motive.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2929267
Yeah, I pay a $700 power bill. Come on, thats a bit drastic isn't it? I mean, yes I probably pay a few bucks more than you do on my monthly bill, but I'm OK with that tax. In fact, I would rather pay a few bucks more in this situation. Look, its ok to say dead beats 'stealing' your electricity are bad, but look at this guy. I would rather 100 deadbeats steal my heat rather than this 1 patriot dying. That is, in my opinion, efficient...or at least more efficient than the power company getting their money.
You don't get it. THERE ARE ALREADY PROGRAMS IN PLACE FOR PEOPLE WITH LEGITIMATE NEEDS. There are for natural gas and even telephone. I don't know why this guy wasn't on one. It sounds like he had the money to pay the bill but for some reason hadn't done it.
 
sickboy

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2929271
You don't get it. THERE ARE ALREADY PROGRAMS IN PLACE FOR PEOPLE WITH LEGITIMATE NEEDS. There are for natural gas and even telephone. I don't know why this guy wasn't on one. It sounds like he had the money to pay the bill but for some reason hadn't done it.
No, you don't get it! Those programs could be retroactively enacted thus saving the mans life instead of the company putting a restricter on his power. If the company was there already, why didn't they ensure they personally talked to him?
 
sickboy

sickboy

Active Member
Originally Posted by jennythebugg
http:///forum/post/2929273
i just got finished paying a $900 dollar one month bill i wonder if his $1000 previous bill was for one month?
You must have a big place! Isn't energy cheaper in Texas?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/2929281
No, you don't get it! Those programs could be retroactively enacted thus saving the mans life instead of the company putting a restricter on his power. If the company was there already, why didn't they ensure they personally talked to him?
They may have assumed he was a snowbird and was south for the winter. Really don't know. It sounds like he had the money to pay for the bill, he may have been sick and couldn't answer the door, I assume they at least announced themselves when going on the property to install the restrictor.
Certainly had to be a better way to handle it but that doesn't include excessive hoops of fire to jump through to make sure people are paying their bills.
 
nwdyr

nwdyr

Active Member
Can you imagine what that man has lived thru in 93yrs.....and THIS is how he dies.....WOW! If that was my family I swear I would wack the guy who put that thing on the meter!
 
scsinet

scsinet

Active Member
Wow. This thread runs the gamut.
First, I don't understand what his being a veteran has to do with anything. Those men and women who serve our country deserve our utmost respect and gratitude. However, IMO this does not equate to free utilities.
It seems like whenever something happens to a veteran, the media is quick to point it out as if that somehow makes whatever was done to that individual worse.
Turn it around... would what the power company did be less reprehensible if the man was not a veteran? Would it be less reprensible for someone who was younger than 93 years? It's no better or worse. People are people. His age, his service record have nothing to do with it. Yet, both are clearly stated.
Next, power companies have their rules of engagement. They put disconnect notices on bills and put postings on doors. They make an effort to contact the customer prior to disconnect. Do not assume that just because this article didn't mention it, that it didn't happen. If the article took the time to mention a totally irrelevant fact, that being that he is a veteran, it is certainly reasonable to expect them to leave out perfectly relevant facts, like the power company trying to contact him or any other circumstances that might justify their actions.
Besides, did anyone happen to see the forest through the trees here? The power company DID successfully contact him! He had a bill payment ready! How can you say the power company didn't do enough when the guy actually got the message? Furthermore, this guy obviously didn't feel he was special because he was a veteran, he had a payment ready.
I'm not saying what happened here was not tragic. However, it seems to me that if everybody that could come up with some reason why they should not have to pay for electricty was allowed a free ride, then those assistance funds would be overwhelmed.
I'm sure by this time tomorrow someone will have twisted my words into being anti-veteran.
 
renogaw

renogaw

Active Member
a problem will occur is IF the state has a no shutoff law, like connecticut does. power and gas cannot be turned off during the winter. they dont though care about oil and LP customers since those are private markets.
 
bigarn

bigarn

Active Member
Originally Posted by blacktop pete
http:///forum/post/2930057
there is no reasoning how this man or any other person should freeze to death in this country. what a discrace.
I agree 100% ... I also agree there's dirt bags out there who just don't pay for whatever reason, but does this deserve a death penalty?
This poor guy was 93 years old ... gimme a break! Who knows how long it took him to even comprehend the money he owed.
 
jerthunter

jerthunter

Active Member
I wonder why his neighbors and friends, who are angry at the city, didn't help him pay his bill on time. Or maybe invite him to stay over at their place when his power got shutoff. Or call for help when they realized that his home was getting cold.
 
scsinet

scsinet

Active Member
Originally Posted by VALgae
http:///forum/post/2930475
why didnt HE call for help? did he not have a phone either?
Now there's a good question. Did he not have the means to somehow, someway contact the power company and arrange for payment? Power companies do not cut people off unless they have no other choice.
Again, facts and backstory that may have been left out by the article in favor of obvious pandering for public opinion.
The media's job is to get people to read. People with "boiling blood" read the articles. They post them on message boards for other people to read, further increasing their reader base.
That's why relying on this article as the sole source of information is shortsighted. There may well be lots of facts that we do not know about.
What we do know, as I pointed out before, is that the fact that he is 93 years old and the fact that he is a veteran are 100% irrelevant. Yet the article makes a point to mention both. Does that not call into question the ethical standards of the source, and therefore call into question the validity or impartiality of the article?
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Eh, he was 93 anyways, already collected more than his fair share of Social security...
What? to soon for the jokes to begin?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top